Can the 1/350 trumpeter North Carolina kit be built as the USS Washington during her Atlantic war period without heavy modification?

It depends on your definition of "heavy modification". The biggest difference was the layout of the 20MM and .50cal guns. I can give you my best guess about the differences. Contact me off line dick_jensen_44@msn.com

No one noticed the funnels are completely wrong but yet you're wondering about the scale diameter of the 16" rifles? None of you geniuses have calipers? Total :censored_2: in outline like most of Trumpeter's models. I've been on the real ship many times and viewed it from the other side of the Cape fear river and know this model looks WRONG.

No one noticed the funnels are completely wrong but yet you're wondering about the scale diameter of the 16" rifles? None of you geniuses have calipers? Total in outline like most of Trumpeter's models. I've been on the real ship many times and viewed it from the other side of the Cape fear river and know this model looks WRONG.

Some good news! Accurately shaped, sized and detailed 3D-printed products for North Carolina class battleships are available in several popular scales:

Most of these products are also available in 1/570 (for Revell) and 1/700.

If you are building USS North Carolina as she appeared after a fatal 1945 friendly fire accident destroyed the functionality of her port-side Mk.37 director, you'll need a single square-back director. The one damaged angle-back was replaced with a square-back (see photo below). 3D-printed "square-back" directors are available, too: http://shpws.me/JEkF

Please take advantage of Shapeways' FREE SHIPPING offer for sales of more than $25 on "Cyber Monday", November 27th.

In doing some BB research, I've run across a curious discrepancy. Depending on the source, NC is credited with either 12 or 15 WW2 battle stars. DANFS says 15, but several books, including Alan Pater's "United States Battleships," say 12.

I have not run into this discrepancy with any other BB, and I'm wondering if anyone knows the reason for the difference in numbers. Pater lists the 12 as follows:

Question regarding boot topping placement on Trumpeter 1/700. Do I put it above the hull break point or below or split it in between? Im building a full hull. I put it BELOW hull break and it looks off a bit. Help?

Is there a schematic out there for Measure 12 Modified (splotches) camouflage that Washington wore in the Atlantic? I am talking the one with navy blue hull, ocean gray superstructures mixed with some haze gray tops. I assume the decks were already navy blue also.

I found only this one so far which Im not sure is accurate and only one sided...

I drew the color profile you've attached - it was drawn using photo references only, since (as far as I can tell) there are no decent schematics available that show the pattern, and the USN did not issue design patterns for Ms12mod as it did the Measure 31-32-33 patterns. There are several good photos available on Navsource that show the starboard side of BB-56 I used to get the pattern as correct as possible. The ship itself was plotted from Floating Drydock plans of BB-55 in 1942 and modified accordingly. I drew six versions of North Carolina throughout her wartime service life as well - all the class drawings I made are available here: http://shipbucket.com/drawings/search?c ... h+carolina I generally do not make portside profiles except in rare cases.

I drew the color profile you've attached - it was drawn using photo references only, since (as far as I can tell) there are no decent schematics available that show the pattern, and the USN did not issue design patterns for Ms12mod as it did the Measure 31-32-33 patterns. There are several good photos available on Navsource that show the starboard side of BB-56 I used to get the pattern as correct as possible. The ship itself was plotted from Floating Drydock plans of BB-55 in 1942 and modified accordingly. I drew six versions of North Carolina throughout her wartime service life as well - all the class drawings I made are available here: http://shipbucket.com/drawings/search?c ... h+carolina I generally do not make portside profiles except in rare cases.

Love your work man! Ok Can you specify - the tip top part of bow section is that haze grey or ocean grey?

Hard to tell but your drawings imply haze gray and I foind it hard to believe they used haze grey.

Apparently in 2014 when I drew it, I made the judgment that the bow section was 5-H Haze Grey (though now I'd probably leave it as 5-O). From reading this forum, it seems like it wasn't unheard of for some ships to paint the Ms12mod pattern outside regulations (and this seems to have included carrying 5-H into areas that shouldn't have had it, etc).

From consulting photos again (especially this one), I think I need to go revisit that area of the drawing and change it from 5-H to 5-O. I'm not sure why I originally thought that area was lighter... maybe a comment in this thread somewhere? Either way - the tone of the bow panel matches the tone of the No.1 turret so I think it's definitely 5-O. Interesting to note is the way the 5-N on the hull seems to curve upwards between the two forward turrets.

Apparently in 2014 when I drew it, I made the judgment that the bow section was 5-H Haze Grey (though now I'd probably leave it as 5-O). From reading this forum, it seems like it wasn't unheard of for some ships to paint the Ms12mod pattern outside regulations (and this seems to have included carrying 5-H into areas that shouldn't have had it, etc).

From consulting photos again (especially this one), I think I need to go revisit that area of the drawing and change it from 5-H to 5-O. I'm not sure why I originally thought that area was lighter... maybe a comment in this thread somewhere? Either way - the tone of the bow panel matches the tone of the No.1 turret so I think it's definitely 5-O. Interesting to note is the way the 5-N on the hull seems to curve upwards between the two forward turrets.

It all makes sense though, doesnt it? The camo is inspired by rough seas and gray sky. So you got some high waves on front somewhere. Really like this camo a lot more than MS22. Thanks for making that drawing, it helps me in my modelling, wish there was another side and turrets. Turrets should not be colored on top as deck blue btw.

Now in November, the forward MK-38 carries the MK-3 Mod.2 radar but what about the fire control radar on the aft MK-38? It appears to be a MK-8 Mod.0 fire control radar? Is this correct?Can anyone explain when MK-8 Mod.0 FC radars were installed on ships or on the BB-56? http://navsource.org/archives/01/056/015673b.jpg

I think the photo you reference last is much later than November 1942. The Navsource caption for the photo only states it is after the November 13 battle, but not how much after. There are two other things in the photo to look at that would indicate a much later date. First she now has quad 40 mm guns in place of the 1.1 inch AA guns and second the demarcation line for the 5N paint on the lower hull curves down so that it runs below the anchor. From August 1942 to after the November battle the 5N line ran through the anchor and she was armed with 1.1 inch mounts and not 40 mm. I think the radar she had in August 1942 was still the same in November 1942.

Is there a good info on radars that Washington carried in its North Atlantic mid 1942 fit? BEFORE moving to Pacific basically. What difference was vs Guadalcanal, in other way of asking. Trumpeter kit 1/700 is all over the place - its clearly pre Guadalcanal hull but not sure about radar setup.

Is there a good info on radars that Washington carried in its North Atlantic mid 1942 fit? BEFORE moving to Pacific basically. What difference was vs Guadalcanal, in other way of asking.

The mid-1942 radar package included (see the picture below):

Attachment:

BB-56.jpg [ 312.52 KiB | Viewed 417 times ]

- One CXAM-1 air search radar on a top of the foremast- Two Mark 3 Mod. 1 fire control radars on a top of both Mark 38 directors- Three Mark 4 fire control radars on a top of the forward, port and starboard Mark 37 directors

The following modifications were done in 8/1942, before BB-56 sailed to the the Pacific:- One SG surface search radar was installed on a front side of the superstructure tower- The fourth Mark 4 FCR was placed on a top of the aft Mark 37 director

The next alternations were done in 7/1943 and are depicted on this picture:- The CXAM-1 was replaced by the SK air search radar- The SG radar was moved on a top of the foremast- The forward Mark 3 Mod. 1 FCR was replaced by the Mod. 0 variant- The aft Mark 3 Mod. 1 FCR was replaced by the Mark 8 FCR

During the spring-1944 repairs following the collision with USS Indiana, the radar package was modified again:- The forward Mark 3 Mod. 0 FCR was replaced by the Mark 8 FCR- The second SG surface search radar was placed on a top of the mainmast- The Mark 27 FCR was placed just above a top of the conning tower

Before the end of the 1944, the Mark 4 FCRs were switched to the Mark 12/22s

The final alterations were done between 6/1945 and 9/1945 and can be seen here:- The forward Mark 8 FCR was replaced by the Mark 13 FCR- The SR air search radar was placed on a top of the mainmast

Is there a good info on radars that Washington carried in its North Atlantic mid 1942 fit? BEFORE moving to Pacific basically. What difference was vs Guadalcanal, in other way of asking.

The mid-1942 radar package included (see the picture below):

Attachment:

BB-56.jpg

- One CXAM-1 air search radar on a top of the foremast- Two Mark 3 Mod. 1 fire control radars on a top of both Mark 38 directors- Three Mark 4 fire control radars on a top of the forward, port and starboard Mark 37 directors

The following modifications were done in 8/1942, before BB-56 sailed to the the Pacific:- One SG surface search radar was installed on a front side of the superstructure tower- The fourth Mark 4 FCR was placed on a top of the aft Mark 37 director

The next alternations were done in 7/1943 and are depicted on this picture:- The CXAM-1 was replaced by the SK air search radar- The SG radar was moved on a top of the foremast- The forward Mark 3 Mod. 1 FCR was replaced by the Mod. 0 variant- The aft Mark 3 Mod. 1 FCR was replaced by the Mark 8 FCR

During the spring-1944 repairs following the collision with USS Indiana, the radar package was modified again:- The forward Mark 3 Mod. 0 FCR was replaced by the Mark 8 FCR- The second SG surface search radar was placed on a top of the mainmast- The Mark 27 FCR was placed just above a top of the conning tower

Before the end of the 1944, the Mark 4 FCRs were switched to the Mark 12/22s

The final alterations were done between 6/1945 and 9/1945 and can be seen here:- The forward Mark 8 FCR was replaced by the Mark 13 FCR- The SR air search radar was placed on a top of the mainmast

holy cow, I did come to the exactly the same conclusions you posted, but through a ton of research. Wish this was there. This should go to front page of this thread or something. Thank you.